subject:"Re\: Bush's Wiretap of Americans\: Conservatives\?"


I didn't say without cause nor warrant, did I?  Clearly you understand
the need of cooperation between the telecommunications companies and
the government to intercept international phone calls and/or e-mails
of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists.  Like I said,
keep your nose clean and you shouldn't have any worries.  It should
help you rest better at night, really!

BTW, have you met Jack?  He's new here too!  You two seem to have alot
in common! ;)





On Jun 29, 1:24 am, Frederick The Moderate
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap
 every political adversary and their families and friends, without
 cause. No perhaps none of your friends or family would ever need
 protecting but I wouldn't want any politician to have that kind of
 power and neither did the Founding Fathers.

 On Jun 28, 9:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:



  I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
  if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
  or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
  so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
  it?

  On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Mrs. Rabbit,

   Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
   take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
   about it a bit more.

   On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If you
are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.

And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:


 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?
 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:

http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKriref=mf

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.comwrote:

 Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
 Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.

 And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush

 On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:


 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?
 



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Hey, lay off of Lincoln!  If the JAMES BUCHANAN  had actually done his
JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!

Lincoln was of pure mind and heart.



On Jun 29, 9:18 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:
 Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:

 http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKri...

 On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.comwrote:



  Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
  Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.

  And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush

  On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
  frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
  Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
  Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
  agenda?- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread RichardForbes


And, he had the coolest hat.  I think that is what the Cat in the
Hat used as a model.

On Jun 29, 8:01 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hey, lay off of Lincoln!  If the JAMES BUCHANAN  had actually done his
 JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!

 Lincoln was of pure mind and heart.

 On Jun 29, 9:18 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:



  Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:

 http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKri...

  On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.comwrote:

   Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
   Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.

   And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush

   On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Mrs Rabbit: Cleary you understand the need to intercept...
international phone calls and/or e-mails
 of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists. 

Therein lies the problem. Bush at first claimed he was only listening
in on the kinds of calls you describe. It wasn't long before it was
revealed he was actually listening on domestic calls on people people
not suspected of anything.

Me, I wouldn't have a problem with legistlation being introduced that
would allow intercepting calls to Syria, Saudi et. al. countries on a
watch list but NO ONE should be allowed to blatently violate the
Consitution like that with impunity. The proof was conclusive. That's
tyranny. That's exactly the kind of power Richard talks about
preventing.

On Jun 29, 5:16 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
 I didn't say without cause nor warrant, did I?  Clearly you understand
 the need of cooperation between the telecommunications companies and
 the government to intercept international phone calls and/or e-mails
 of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists.  Like I said,
 keep your nose clean and you shouldn't have any worries.  It should
 help you rest better at night, really!

 BTW, have you met Jack?  He's new here too!  You two seem to have alot
 in common! ;)

 On Jun 29, 1:24 am, Frederick The Moderate



 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
  So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap
  every political adversary and their families and friends, without
  cause. No perhaps none of your friends or family would ever need
  protecting but I wouldn't want any politician to have that kind of
  power and neither did the Founding Fathers.

  On Jun 28, 9:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

   I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
   if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
   or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
   so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
   it?

   On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Mrs. Rabbit,

Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
about it a bit more.

On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

 LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

 So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If you
 are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
 calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
 to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
 people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

 BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

 On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
  Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
  Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the 
  GOP
  agenda?- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Again, I don't have a problem with legally passed legislation. I don't
like or approve of many of our laws. But when Bush was caught doing
it, it wasn't legal.

On Jun 29, 5:42 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
 You mean the Democrat Congress' Electronic Eavesdroppong Bill, that was
 passed in 2007?  The one that our current President supported and voted
 for??

 On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 



 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
  Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
  Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
  agenda?- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

Obama, Bush, FDR: Together Againhttp://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html

Posted on June 29, 2009, 9:04am | Nick
Gillespiehttp://www.reason.com/staff/hitandrun/129.html

Writing in the *Wash
Post*http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/28/AR2009062802288.html?hpid=opinionsbox1,
Brookings' Benjamin Wittes and Harvard's Jack Goldsmith are disappointed
with President Barack Obama's unilateralist view on detaining suspected
terrorists. They worry that he is simply following George W. Bush's bad
precedent:

Obama, to put it bluntly, seems poised for a nearly wholesale adoption of
the Bush administration's unilateral approach to detention. The attraction
is simple, seductive and familiar. The legal arguments for unilateralism are
strong in theory; past presidents in shorter, traditional wars did not seek
specific congressional input on detention. Securing such input for our
current war, it turns out, is still hard. The unilateral approach, by
contrast, lets the president define the rules in ways that are convenient
for him and then dares the courts to say no.

The authors suggest that Obama follow FDR's lead by getting congressional
input instead:

When Franklin D. Roosevelt sought congressional authorization for the
Lend-Lease program in January 1941, the isolationist-leaning nation was
evenly split over the proposal. After two months of sharp congressional
argument and national debate, almost two-thirds of the country supported
Lend-Lease, and Congress passed the program by large margins. We have just
now engaged in a great debate, Roosevelt proclaimed. It was not limited to
the halls of Congress. It was argued in every newspaper, on every
wavelength, over every cracker barrel in all the land; and it was finally
settled and decided by the American people themselves. Yes, the decisions of
our democracy may be slowly arrived at. But when that decision is made, it
is proclaimed not with the voice of any one man but with the voice of one
hundred and thirty millions. It is binding on us all. And the world is no
longer left in doubt.

It's really great to argue for more input when it comes to all aspects of
war, especially the waging of it in the first place. Wittes and Goldsmith
seem incredibly naive, however, in presuming that Congress is champing at
the bit to make any hard decisions. Recall that Congress did vote on an
authorization of force; recall also that Congress has shied away from
actually declaring war for many decades now. They might not like some
aspects of the Imperial Presidency, but they are also cowards when it comes
to the sort of decisions that they might actually be held accountable for.

In any case, citing FDR in this context strikes me a tin-eared to the
extreme. Didn't he use an executive order to intern what, 100,000 Japanese
Americans during World War II? That was a unilateralist action that had
moral support in Congress, sure, but was far worse than anything Bush or
Obama dreamed up, much less acted on. The order was also refused by Mountain
State governors, to their credit. Read Eric Muller's great Reason
piecehttp://www.reason.com/news/show/36412.htmlon that racially
driven hysterical legacy of FDR.

And watch Reason.tv on Obama's bad rendition and detention policies, which
have roots not only in the Bush admin but in Bill Clinton's:

Permalink http://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html | 11
Commentshttp://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html#comments

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Frederick The Moderate
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

Again, I don't have a problem with legally passed legislation. I don't
like or approve of many of our laws. But when Bush was caught doing
it, it wasn't legal.

On Jun 29, 5:42 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
You mean the Democrat Congress' Electronic Eavesdroppong Bill, that was
passed in 2007? The one that our current President supported and voted
for??

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate

frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread dick thompson

That goes back to LBJ and Bill Moyers.  That is what they did.  They 
also wiretapped their own staff.  Nothing new with Bush.  Bet Obama is 
doing it right now.

Frederick The Moderate wrote:
 So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap
 every political adversary and their families and friends, without
 cause. No perhaps none of your friends or family would ever need
 protecting but I wouldn't want any politician to have that kind of
 power and neither did the Founding Fathers.

 On Jun 28, 9:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
   
 I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
 if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
 or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
 so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
 it?

 On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:



 
 Mrs. Rabbit,
   
 Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
 take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
 about it a bit more.
   
 On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
   
 LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!
 
 So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If you
 are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
 calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
 to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
 people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.
 
 BTW, which branch of the military were you in?
 
 On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate
 
 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?- Hide quoted text -
   
 - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
 
 - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
   
 - Show quoted text -
 
 

   

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Although I didn't read Bruce's post, I didn't have to. He is
predictible in that, he reacts to any legitimate criticism of his
party / ideology in the way that has typified ConservaRepubs: either
1. Attack and insult the source. This eliminates the need of actually
addressing the issue or
2. Diversion. Point out Yeah but look at what the OTHER guys did in
the case of _! again avoiding that pesky thing of actually
addressing the issue.
In this case it seems that he's gone with 2 and again like most uber-
Cons, doesn't actually have an original thought of his own. So fine.
Bush broke the law. A big one. A CONSTITUTIONAL one. The
ConservaRepubs reply? lol. Look what the OTHER Guys have done!
Precludes ever having to accept any of the accountability they preach
others should be big enough to take, doesn't it?



On Jun 29, 7:31 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:
 Obama, Bush,  FDR: Together 
 Againhttp://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html

 Posted on June 29, 2009, 9:04am | Nick
 Gillespiehttp://www.reason.com/staff/hitandrun/129.html

 Writing in the *Wash
 Post*http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/28/AR200...,
 Brookings' Benjamin Wittes and Harvard's Jack Goldsmith are disappointed
 with President Barack Obama's unilateralist view on detaining suspected
 terrorists. They worry that he is simply following George W. Bush's bad
 precedent:

 Obama, to put it bluntly, seems poised for a nearly wholesale adoption of
 the Bush administration's unilateral approach to detention. The attraction
 is simple, seductive and familiar. The legal arguments for unilateralism are
 strong in theory; past presidents in shorter, traditional wars did not seek
 specific congressional input on detention. Securing such input for our
 current war, it turns out, is still hard. The unilateral approach, by
 contrast, lets the president define the rules in ways that are convenient
 for him and then dares the courts to say no.

 The authors suggest that Obama follow FDR's lead by getting congressional
 input instead:

 When Franklin D. Roosevelt sought congressional authorization for the
 Lend-Lease program in January 1941, the isolationist-leaning nation was
 evenly split over the proposal. After two months of sharp congressional
 argument and national debate, almost two-thirds of the country supported
 Lend-Lease, and Congress passed the program by large margins. We have just
 now engaged in a great debate, Roosevelt proclaimed. It was not limited to
 the halls of Congress. It was argued in every newspaper, on every
 wavelength, over every cracker barrel in all the land; and it was finally
 settled and decided by the American people themselves. Yes, the decisions of
 our democracy may be slowly arrived at. But when that decision is made, it
 is proclaimed not with the voice of any one man but with the voice of one
 hundred and thirty millions. It is binding on us all. And the world is no
 longer left in doubt.

 It's really great to argue for more input when it comes to all aspects of
 war, especially the waging of it in the first place. Wittes and Goldsmith
 seem incredibly naive, however, in presuming that Congress is champing at
 the bit to make any hard decisions. Recall that Congress did vote on an
 authorization of force; recall also that Congress has shied away from
 actually declaring war for many decades now. They might not like some
 aspects of the Imperial Presidency, but they are also cowards when it comes
 to the sort of decisions that they might actually be held accountable for.

 In any case, citing FDR in this context strikes me a tin-eared to the
 extreme. Didn't he use an executive order to intern what, 100,000 Japanese
 Americans during World War II? That was a unilateralist action that had
 moral support in Congress, sure, but was far worse than anything Bush or
 Obama dreamed up, much less acted on. The order was also refused by Mountain
 State governors, to their credit. Read Eric Muller's great Reason
 piecehttp://www.reason.com/news/show/36412.htmlon that racially
 driven hysterical legacy of FDR.

 And watch Reason.tv on Obama's bad rendition and detention policies, which
 have roots not only in the Bush admin but in Bill Clinton's:

  Permalink http://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html | 11
 Commentshttp://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html#comments

 On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Frederick The Moderate 



 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

  Again, I don't have a problem with legally passed legislation. I don't
  like or approve of many of our laws. But when Bush was caught doing
  it, it wasn't legal.

  On Jun 29, 5:42 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
   You mean the Democrat Congress' Electronic Eavesdroppong Bill, that was
   passed in 2007?  The one that our current President supported and voted
   for??

   On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 

   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

So what do all those

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

Moyers also tried to destroy people by outing gay political opponents.  This
was forgotten and then recalled a few years ago and he tried to re-write
history and claim he had never done it.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:02 AM, dick thompson rhomp2...@earthlink.netwrote:

  That goes back to LBJ and Bill Moyers.  That is what they did.  They also
 wiretapped their own staff.  Nothing new with Bush.  Bet Obama is doing it
 right now.

 Frederick The Moderate wrote:

 So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap
 every political adversary and their families and friends, without
 cause. No perhaps none of your friends or family would ever need
 protecting but I wouldn't want any politician to have that kind of
 power and neither did the Founding Fathers.

 On Jun 28, 9:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com 
 mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:


  I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
 if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
 or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
 so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
 it?

 On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com 
 jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:





  Mrs. Rabbit,


  Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
 take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
 about it a bit more.


  On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com 
 mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:


   LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!


   So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If you
 are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
 calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
 to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
 people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.


   BTW, which branch of the military were you in?


   On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate


   frederickshel...@gmail.com frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:


  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -


   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -


  - Show quoted text -



 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Mrs. Rabbit,

Ok, you asked for it.

YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you will
go down on bended knee and submit to anything you're told to submit
to?
Yes, THEY tell you that they are only listening for hints of terrorist
and/or criminal activity. But just who is it that gets to define just
what a suspected terrorist or criminal is? How are you going to stop
the govt. from using ANY information they might aquire with such
taps, in ANY matter they choose?
A suspected terrorist is anyone the govt. says is one. You would
hand the govt. the tools to supress any one they want to?

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
precedent that will reach to himself.   THOMAS PAINE

On Jun 28, 11:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
 I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
 if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
 or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
 so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
 it?

 On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:



  Mrs. Rabbit,

  Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
  take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
  about it a bit more.

  On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

   LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

   So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If you
   are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
   calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
   to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
   people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

   BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

   On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread Keith In Tampa

Once again, revisionist history by far left extremists.

Bush was never caught doing it without legislation or Presidential Order,
both being legal.

Unlike you Fred, I, and most conservatives have a big problem with the
legislation, to include the referenced Eavesdropping bill, (I am forgetting
its actual title right now) as well as several provisions that are contained
within the Patriot Act. This presidential decree, later passed by first a
Republican controlled Congress (with a time stipulation of 5 years) and then
a Democrat controlled Congress (without a time stipulation)  was endorsed by
a President who demanded that Americans give up certain unalienable rights
in the name of national security, yet President Bush refused to secure our
borders, in the name of national security.

It is far worse now.  We have a President who openly voted for the
eavesdropping legislation, and openly advocates open borders as well as
granting amnesty to the criminals who are within our borders who came here
illegally.

These provisos of the Patriot Act that I mention, as well as the
Eavesdropping legislation, are unconstitutional on their face.  No Court, to
date, has ruled on the constitutionality of the provisions that I am
referencing.  It is only  a matter of time

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Frederick The Moderate 
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:


 Again, I don't have a problem with legally passed legislation. I don't
 like or approve of many of our laws. But when Bush was caught doing
 it, it wasn't legal.

 On Jun 29, 5:42 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
  You mean the Democrat Congress' Electronic Eavesdroppong Bill, that was
  passed in 2007?  The one that our current President supported and voted
  for??
 
  On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
 
 
 
  frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -
 
  - Show quoted text -
  


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread M. Johnson




Keith In Tampa
 Bush was never caught doing it without 
 legislation or Presidential Order, both being
legal. 
MJ

http://www.constitution.org/cons/constitu.txt
HERE is the Constitution -- the Law of the Land -- do
cite the Article, Section and Clause or Amendment
that:
 a. provides Congress with the Power To make such
 legislation
 b. provides the Executive with the Power To decree
 such a power unto himself.
Regard$,
--MJ
This week, President Bush said that Congress needs 
to give him more power to spy on Americans by 
making changes to the Protect America Act. Did 
you ever notice they always give these pieces 
of legislation names you can't disagree with? 
The Protect America Act. ... Give it a fair 
name. At least call it the Ignore The 
Constitution Act. --  Jay Leno, The Tonight Show


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
  For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
  * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
  * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
  * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread Keith In Tampa

Good Morning Michael,

I suggest that you read my whole post.




On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM, M. Johnson micha...@america.net wrote:

 Keith In Tampa
Bush was never caught doing it without
legislation or Presidential Order, both being legal.

 MJ
 http://www.constitution.org/cons/constitu.txt

 HERE is the Constitution -- the Law of the Land -- do
 cite the Article, Section and Clause or Amendment
 that:
   a. provides Congress with the Power To make such
   legislation
   b. provides the Executive with the Power To decree
   such a power unto himself.

 Regard$,
 --MJ

 This week, President Bush said that Congress needs
 to give him more power to spy on Americans by
 making changes to the Protect America Act. Did
 you ever notice they always give these pieces
 of legislation names you can't disagree with?
 The Protect America Act. ... Give it a fair
 name. At least call it the Ignore The
 Constitution Act.   -- Jay Leno, The Tonight Show


 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread THE ANNOINTED ONE


Any man that would start a civil war to collect inequally applied
taxes should not be admired. That would be Lincoln.

On Jun 29, 8:01 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hey, lay off of Lincoln!  If the JAMES BUCHANAN  had actually done his
 JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!

 Lincoln was of pure mind and heart.

 On Jun 29, 9:18 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:



  Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:

 http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKri...

  On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.comwrote:

   Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
   Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.

   And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush

   On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


OMG Hollywood, here we go chasing tails again.sigh.

Regardless of what you *hear* or read, as Dick mentioned, they have
and will continue to do these acts.  Not that Obama will admit it, but
he stays up late at night reading your postyeah, he's on to you.
Better get a wireless cards, but then again, they have GPSoh well,
looks like your screwed!  j/k

I understand your point Hollywood, really I do.  But I do not do
anything that would warrant me to live such a secrect life.  Like I
said, if Obama, yo mama, Bush or even Rush the band wanted to listen
to each and every phone call in and out of here, then so be it.  I
have nothing to hide, so there is no reason to *protect family
members* from ease dropping.  Besides, we only pay for the USE of the
lines/airwavesthey do not belong to us, we rent them.  Mama always
said to never say anything you would be ashamed of or regret and if
any member of my family is using MY service to break the law, then
they need to be caught, period.  What do you think Obama would do with
the information about my kids latest boyfriend saga?  Or my Dads
latest lawn report?  Zip, nodda dang thang!

Ok, I've humored you, feel better now?  :D



On Jun 29, 11:13 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Mrs. Rabbit,

 Ok, you asked for it.

 YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
 consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
 important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
 govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you will
 go down on bended knee and submit to anything you're told to submit
 to?
 Yes, THEY tell you that they are only listening for hints of terrorist
 and/or criminal activity. But just who is it that gets to define just
 what a suspected terrorist or criminal is? How are you going to stop
 the govt. from using ANY information they might aquire with such
 taps, in ANY matter they choose?
 A suspected terrorist is anyone the govt. says is one. You would
 hand the govt. the tools to supress any one they want to?

 He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
 from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
 precedent that will reach to himself.   THOMAS PAINE

 On Jun 28, 11:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:



  I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
  if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
  or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
  so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
  it?

  On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Mrs. Rabbit,

   Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
   take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
   about it a bit more.

   On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If you
are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread Keith In Tampa

Agreed Mark,

Moreover, Lincoln could have avoided the war, if he had one ounce of
diplomatic skills, which obviously he didn't.

President Lincoln grossly distorted and exaggerated the motives of the
South. He constantly insisted that the South wanted to “destroy” the Union,
when it merely wanted to withdraw from it. He called honorable men like
Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee “traitors,” though they never betrayed
anyone in their lives. He accused the South of “aggression,” when it was the
South that was being invaded, and truly destroyed, by the Union armies.
Having assured the country that he had neither the power nor the inclination
to disturb slavery, Lincoln made the destruction of slavery his lofty war
aim in the middle of the war!


The most glaring proof lies in the reaction to the Emancipation
Proclamation, which was simply an ultimatum to the Confederacy. All states
not in rebellion could keep their slaves, as could any state that ceased
participation in the war within 100 days. Years ago, I found a list
generated from some federal government entity, (Maybe the U.S. Census?)  on
the internet, that showed the actual slave holders in each state, and every
state in the Union between 1861 and 1863 had slaves, to include all of the
Northern States!!



Revisionist historians and Moonbats would like to portray Lincoln as this
individual who ended slavery, and that the Southern United States whole
initiative in seceding and rebelling was revolving around
slavery.   According to Moonbats, the South is fighting a bloody and costly
war to preserve slavery. Here is where Moonbats and Revisionist Historians
get caught up in their treachery and revision:



Almost two years after the start of hostilities and the Southern States
seceding, on January 1, 1863,  President Lincoln publicly announces that the
South may keep their slaves if they just stop fighting. If it were as
Revisionist Historians' and Moonbats' claim, (e.g.; that the South seceded
only over slavery)   the Confederate States  would shoulder their rifles,
march home, keep their slaves and declare victory. Historically, if it is as
Revisionist Historians and Moonbats believe, the Emancipation Proclamation
would be considered a declaration of surrender by the Union. So why didn’t
the southerners stop the war and keep their slaves? Only one possible
answer……Slavery wasn’t the sole issue!!!





On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:02 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE markmka...@gmail.comwrote:


 Any man that would start a civil war to collect inequally applied
 taxes should not be admired. That would be Lincoln.

 On Jun 29, 8:01 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hey, lay off of Lincoln!  If the JAMES BUCHANAN  had actually done his
  JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!
 
  Lincoln was of pure mind and heart.
 
  On Jun 29, 9:18 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 
 
   Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:
 
  http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKri.
 ..
 
   On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.
 
And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush
 
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the
 GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -
 
   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
  
  - Show quoted text -
 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


50 lashes with a wet noodle for you ole boy!  Buchana should have done
his damn jobgo back and read up on the 15 presidentno wonder
he never married!

Freeing the slaves was not Lincolns priority ya know




On Jun 29, 12:02 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE markmka...@gmail.com wrote:
 Any man that would start a civil war to collect inequally applied
 taxes should not be admired. That would be Lincoln.

 On Jun 29, 8:01 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:



  Hey, lay off of Lincoln!  If the JAMES BUCHANAN  had actually done his
  JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!

  Lincoln was of pure mind and heart.

  On Jun 29, 9:18 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:

   Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:

  http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKri...

   On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors 
   bruce.maj...@gmail.comwrote:

Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.

And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


nanana boostick your head inwell, you get the picture...:D

Seriously Holly, do you want to limit HOW we are protected??  What if
you have your way...and GOD forbid anything else happens on US
soilOBL or some other mad man/woman repeats similar acts as
9/11your family members are victims...you would cry like a stuck
pig because your family wasn't protected... whine whine whine.  Good
lord man, suck it up...

Studio will be posting his 9/11 conspiracy theories again!




On Jun 29, 12:37 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Mrs, Rabbit,

 Once again, your position is  only  you and your life to be important,
 that principles and legal prededents are not. OK, if that's the way
 you want to play it.
  Methinks you are pretending to be a lot more dull-witted than you
 actually are.

 On Jun 29, 11:15 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:



  OMG Hollywood, here we go chasing tails again.sigh.

  Regardless of what you *hear* or read, as Dick mentioned, they have
  and will continue to do these acts.  Not that Obama will admit it, but
  he stays up late at night reading your postyeah, he's on to you.
  Better get a wireless cards, but then again, they have GPSoh well,
  looks like your screwed!  j/k

  I understand your point Hollywood, really I do.  But I do not do
  anything that would warrant me to live such a secrect life.  Like I
  said, if Obama, yo mama, Bush or even Rush the band wanted to listen
  to each and every phone call in and out of here, then so be it.  I
  have nothing to hide, so there is no reason to *protect family
  members* from ease dropping.  Besides, we only pay for the USE of the
  lines/airwavesthey do not belong to us, we rent them.  Mama always
  said to never say anything you would be ashamed of or regret and if
  any member of my family is using MY service to break the law, then
  they need to be caught, period.  What do you think Obama would do with
  the information about my kids latest boyfriend saga?  Or my Dads
  latest lawn report?  Zip, nodda dang thang!

  Ok, I've humored you, feel better now?  :D

  On Jun 29, 11:13 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Mrs. Rabbit,

   Ok, you asked for it.

   YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
   consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
   important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
   govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you will
   go down on bended knee and submit to anything you're told to submit
   to?
   Yes, THEY tell you that they are only listening for hints of terrorist
   and/or criminal activity. But just who is it that gets to define just
   what a suspected terrorist or criminal is? How are you going to stop
   the govt. from using ANY information they might aquire with such
   taps, in ANY matter they choose?
   A suspected terrorist is anyone the govt. says is one. You would
   hand the govt. the tools to supress any one they want to?

   He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
   from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
   precedent that will reach to himself.   THOMAS PAINE

   On Jun 28, 11:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
it?

On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Mrs. Rabbit,

 Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
 take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
 about it a bit more.

 On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

  LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

  So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If 
  you
  are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
  calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
  to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
  people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

  BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

  On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

  frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with 
   the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 -

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


btw, my position will always be me and mine first and foremostit's
the mama in me, can't help it.

:o)



On Jun 29, 12:37 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Mrs, Rabbit,

 Once again, your position is  only  you and your life to be important,
 that principles and legal prededents are not. OK, if that's the way
 you want to play it.
  Methinks you are pretending to be a lot more dull-witted than you
 actually are.

 On Jun 29, 11:15 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:



  OMG Hollywood, here we go chasing tails again.sigh.

  Regardless of what you *hear* or read, as Dick mentioned, they have
  and will continue to do these acts.  Not that Obama will admit it, but
  he stays up late at night reading your postyeah, he's on to you.
  Better get a wireless cards, but then again, they have GPSoh well,
  looks like your screwed!  j/k

  I understand your point Hollywood, really I do.  But I do not do
  anything that would warrant me to live such a secrect life.  Like I
  said, if Obama, yo mama, Bush or even Rush the band wanted to listen
  to each and every phone call in and out of here, then so be it.  I
  have nothing to hide, so there is no reason to *protect family
  members* from ease dropping.  Besides, we only pay for the USE of the
  lines/airwavesthey do not belong to us, we rent them.  Mama always
  said to never say anything you would be ashamed of or regret and if
  any member of my family is using MY service to break the law, then
  they need to be caught, period.  What do you think Obama would do with
  the information about my kids latest boyfriend saga?  Or my Dads
  latest lawn report?  Zip, nodda dang thang!

  Ok, I've humored you, feel better now?  :D

  On Jun 29, 11:13 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Mrs. Rabbit,

   Ok, you asked for it.

   YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
   consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
   important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
   govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you will
   go down on bended knee and submit to anything you're told to submit
   to?
   Yes, THEY tell you that they are only listening for hints of terrorist
   and/or criminal activity. But just who is it that gets to define just
   what a suspected terrorist or criminal is? How are you going to stop
   the govt. from using ANY information they might aquire with such
   taps, in ANY matter they choose?
   A suspected terrorist is anyone the govt. says is one. You would
   hand the govt. the tools to supress any one they want to?

   He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
   from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
   precedent that will reach to himself.   THOMAS PAINE

   On Jun 28, 11:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
it?

On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Mrs. Rabbit,

 Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
 take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
 about it a bit more.

 On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

  LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

  So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If 
  you
  are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many phones
  calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
  to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red flags,
  people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

  BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

  On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

  frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with 
   the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Keith:  Unlike you Fred, I, and most conservatives have a big problem
with the
 legislation, to include the referenced Eavesdropping bill,

If I was unclear, let me edify. I have a big problem with the Patriot
Act. I don't like it at all. I thought I mentioned that. What I was
writing was that Bush got caught listening in on domestic calls from/
to persons NOT of interests (a few hundred million of them), without
legal warrants and outside the parameters of the PA. That was illegal.
Not that the faithful would ever admit Bush / Cheney did one single
thing wrong

On Jun 29, 8:47 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
 Once again, revisionist history by far left extremists.

 Bush was never caught doing it without legislation or Presidential Order,
 both being legal.

 Unlike you Fred, I, and most conservatives have a big problem with the
 legislation, to include the referenced Eavesdropping bill, (I am forgetting
 its actual title right now) as well as several provisions that are contained
 within the Patriot Act. This presidential decree, later passed by first a
 Republican controlled Congress (with a time stipulation of 5 years) and then
 a Democrat controlled Congress (without a time stipulation)  was endorsed by
 a President who demanded that Americans give up certain unalienable rights
 in the name of national security, yet President Bush refused to secure our
 borders, in the name of national security.

 It is far worse now.  We have a President who openly voted for the
 eavesdropping legislation, and openly advocates open borders as well as
 granting amnesty to the criminals who are within our borders who came here
 illegally.

 These provisos of the Patriot Act that I mention, as well as the
 Eavesdropping legislation, are unconstitutional on their face.  No Court, to
 date, has ruled on the constitutionality of the provisions that I am
 referencing.  It is only  a matter of time

 On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Frederick The Moderate 



 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

  Again, I don't have a problem with legally passed legislation. I don't
  like or approve of many of our laws. But when Bush was caught doing
  it, it wasn't legal.

  On Jun 29, 5:42 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
   You mean the Democrat Congress' Electronic Eavesdroppong Bill, that was
   passed in 2007?  The one that our current President supported and voted
   for??

   On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate 

   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:

So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Mrs, Rabbit,

Lucky thing for the country you hold no elected position of
responsibility for the country as a whole, ain't it?

On Jun 29, 12:01 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
 btw, my position will always be me and mine first and foremostit's
 the mama in me, can't help it.

 :o)

 On Jun 29, 12:37 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:



  Mrs, Rabbit,

  Once again, your position is  only  you and your life to be important,
  that principles and legal prededents are not. OK, if that's the way
  you want to play it.
   Methinks you are pretending to be a lot more dull-witted than you
  actually are.

  On Jun 29, 11:15 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

   OMG Hollywood, here we go chasing tails again.sigh.

   Regardless of what you *hear* or read, as Dick mentioned, they have
   and will continue to do these acts.  Not that Obama will admit it, but
   he stays up late at night reading your postyeah, he's on to you.
   Better get a wireless cards, but then again, they have GPSoh well,
   looks like your screwed!  j/k

   I understand your point Hollywood, really I do.  But I do not do
   anything that would warrant me to live such a secrect life.  Like I
   said, if Obama, yo mama, Bush or even Rush the band wanted to listen
   to each and every phone call in and out of here, then so be it.  I
   have nothing to hide, so there is no reason to *protect family
   members* from ease dropping.  Besides, we only pay for the USE of the
   lines/airwavesthey do not belong to us, we rent them.  Mama always
   said to never say anything you would be ashamed of or regret and if
   any member of my family is using MY service to break the law, then
   they need to be caught, period.  What do you think Obama would do with
   the information about my kids latest boyfriend saga?  Or my Dads
   latest lawn report?  Zip, nodda dang thang!

   Ok, I've humored you, feel better now?  :D

   On Jun 29, 11:13 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Mrs. Rabbit,

Ok, you asked for it.

YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you will
go down on bended knee and submit to anything you're told to submit
to?
Yes, THEY tell you that they are only listening for hints of terrorist
and/or criminal activity. But just who is it that gets to define just
what a suspected terrorist or criminal is? How are you going to stop
the govt. from using ANY information they might aquire with such
taps, in ANY matter they choose?
A suspected terrorist is anyone the govt. says is one. You would
hand the govt. the tools to supress any one they want to?

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
precedent that will reach to himself.   THOMAS PAINE

On Jun 28, 11:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

 I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
 if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
 or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
 so be it.  If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
 it?

 On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Mrs. Rabbit,

  Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
  take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
  about it a bit more.

  On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com 
  wrote:

   LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!

   So I take it you oppose wiretapping?  What are you afraid of?  If 
   you
   are doing the right thing, then what does it matter?  As many 
   phones
   calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to 
   listen
   to them all anyways.  It's the people who are sending up red 
   flags,
   people of interest, whom they seek and monitor.

   BTW, which branch of the military were you in?

   On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with 
the GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Mrs. Rabbit,

LOL! When were you guaranteed it would be safe to live as a free
person under our Constituion and Bill of Rights? Have Americans become
sniveling cowards? You GOD-DAMN right there are limitations on how we
are protected
.
 How about the Govt. ban the private ownership of firearms so you can
feel safer? That OK with you?

How about the govt. require an internal passport and have you ask
permission to travel outside your home county? Report where your going
and why and for how long you'll be gone? Have to keep track of the
movements of potential terrorists and trouble-makers don't they? You
don't think the govt. would give national security as the reason you
doing such a thing?

YOU are the one that needs to cowboy up and understand that our
rights as Americans under the Constituion and Bill of Rights are more
important that the lives of a few thousand Americans or even a few
million. Why yes, I usually do cry when I lose a member of my family.
I grieve for awhile and then go on with my life. What's your point?

Oh hell, why bother. Maybe you really are as dull-witted as you
pretend to be.







YOU are the coward dear lady. Your precious life is more important to
you than your Constituion, your freedom and worse the freedom of
generations of Americans yet unborn.

On Jun 29, 11:51 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
 nanana boostick your head inwell, you get the picture...:D

 Seriously Holly, do you want to limit HOW we are protected??  What if
 you have your way...and GOD forbid anything else happens on US
 soilOBL or some other mad man/woman repeats similar acts as
 9/11your family members are victims...you would cry like a stuck
 pig because your family wasn't protected... whine whine whine.  Good
 lord man, suck it up...

 Studio will be posting his 9/11 conspiracy theories again!

 On Jun 29, 12:37 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:



  Mrs, Rabbit,

  Once again, your position is  only  you and your life to be important,
  that principles and legal prededents are not. OK, if that's the way
  you want to play it.
   Methinks you are pretending to be a lot more dull-witted than you
  actually are.

  On Jun 29, 11:15 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

   OMG Hollywood, here we go chasing tails again.sigh.

   Regardless of what you *hear* or read, as Dick mentioned, they have
   and will continue to do these acts.  Not that Obama will admit it, but
   he stays up late at night reading your postyeah, he's on to you.
   Better get a wireless cards, but then again, they have GPSoh well,
   looks like your screwed!  j/k

   I understand your point Hollywood, really I do.  But I do not do
   anything that would warrant me to live such a secrect life.  Like I
   said, if Obama, yo mama, Bush or even Rush the band wanted to listen
   to each and every phone call in and out of here, then so be it.  I
   have nothing to hide, so there is no reason to *protect family
   members* from ease dropping.  Besides, we only pay for the USE of the
   lines/airwavesthey do not belong to us, we rent them.  Mama always
   said to never say anything you would be ashamed of or regret and if
   any member of my family is using MY service to break the law, then
   they need to be caught, period.  What do you think Obama would do with
   the information about my kids latest boyfriend saga?  Or my Dads
   latest lawn report?  Zip, nodda dang thang!

   Ok, I've humored you, feel better now?  :D

   On Jun 29, 11:13 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Mrs. Rabbit,

Ok, you asked for it.

YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you will
go down on bended knee and submit to anything you're told to submit
to?
Yes, THEY tell you that they are only listening for hints of terrorist
and/or criminal activity. But just who is it that gets to define just
what a suspected terrorist or criminal is? How are you going to stop
the govt. from using ANY information they might aquire with such
taps, in ANY matter they choose?
A suspected terrorist is anyone the govt. says is one. You would
hand the govt. the tools to supress any one they want to?

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a
precedent that will reach to himself.   THOMAS PAINE

On Jun 28, 11:21 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:

 I am not opposed to wire tapping, period.  I have nothing to hide and
 if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
 or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
 so be it.  If it helps keep me and

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread plainolamerican


So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
---
I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.

On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?


Plain,

An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
why.

On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 ---
 I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
 Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.

 On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate



 frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
  Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
  Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
  agenda?- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread plainolamerican


An idiotic statement on your part

hw - you've turned into quite a leghumper these days
esad

On Jun 29, 4:47 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Plain,

 An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
 why.

 On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:

  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
  Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
  ---
  I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
  Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.

  On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

  frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread Estimated Profit 71


Too tired of dim-wits to explain why.

An amazizing show of self-awareness by Hollywood.  We should all give
him a cheer!!!

On Jun 29, 3:47 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
 Plain,

 An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
 why.

 On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:



  So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
  Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
  ---
  I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
  Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.

  On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

  frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
   agenda?- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread plainolamerican


hw is to fritz as euwe is to bez

liberal-sick beyond repair

On Jun 29, 4:59 pm, Estimated Profit 71 richard_forbe...@hotmail.com
wrote:
 Too tired of dim-wits to explain why.

 An amazizing show of self-awareness by Hollywood.  We should all give
 him a cheer!!!

 On Jun 29, 3:47 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Plain,

  An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
  why.

  On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:

   So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
   Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
   ---
   I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
   Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.

   On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

   frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
agenda?- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

  - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?

2009-06-29 Thread RichardForbes


I was just so proud of him for admitting that his dim-wittedness was
tiring.

On Jun 29, 4:05 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:
 hw is to fritz as euwe is to bez

 liberal-sick beyond repair

 On Jun 29, 4:59 pm, Estimated Profit 71 richard_forbe...@hotmail.com
 wrote:



  Too tired of dim-wits to explain why.

  An amazizing show of self-awareness by Hollywood.  We should all give
  him a cheer!!!

  On Jun 29, 3:47 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Plain,

   An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
   why.

   On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:

So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
---
I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.

On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate

frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
 So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
 Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
 Or is the Constitution only important until it interferes with the GOP
 agenda?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

   - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

 - Show quoted text -
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Thanks for being part of PoliticalForum at Google Groups.
For options  help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Bush's Wiretap of Americans: Conservatives?