NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, President Bush has now decided that he won't reauthorize eavesdropping but will pass it off to a Secret Court...

Bush won't reauthorize eavesdropping

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070117/ts_nm/surveillance_bush_dc

Secret court to govern wiretapping plan

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070117/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/domestic_spying

Glad to know that he recognizes he's bound by law just like the rest of us. :rolleyes:

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH


*Wipes brow* That's the best one I've heard all day!

I am overjoyed by this announcement. While paranoia freaks tout that any program that has a stated aim of protecting the American people is for the best, a secret wiretapping program performed without any sort of court oversight can only lead to corruption on the part of the Executive Branch. Security reactionaries must also realize that FISC does its work confidentially and is specifically designed for dealing with matters of national security, making Gonzalez's statement about the courts not having the expertise to deal with national security issues even more ridiculous in this case.

Fuckin' a.

Okay, President Bush has now decided that he won't reauthorize eavesdropping
Maybe he should.

Gee, I thought he didn't listen to polls.

Gee, I thought he didn't listen to polls.

He doesn't base his policies off of polls. Where exactly in the article or any news did it state that President's Bush due to the polls has stated he won't reauthorize the eavesdropping?

I understanding that you're just trying to be a smart ass but what you suggest is the President decided not to reauthorize the eavesdropping based precisely on the polls...BS

Gee, I thought he didn't listen to polls.

He does if it means people are going to hatchet his legs off with carp.

He doesn't base his policies off of polls. Where exactly in the article or any news did it state that President's Bush due to the polls has stated he won't reauthorize the eavesdropping?

I understanding that you're just trying to be a smart ass but what you suggest is the President decided not to reauthorize the eavesdropping based precisely on the polls...BSIt's quite logical that after ignoring the Iraq report, he's trying to reverse the negative trend of the opinion polls by dropping something everyone but a select few hate.

Or maybe he decided that he doesn't need the wiretaps anymore :rolleyes:

He doesn't base his policies off of polls. Where exactly in the article or any news did it state that President's Bush due to the polls has stated he won't reauthorize the eavesdropping?

The very fact that he dropped it. It's funny that he authorized it, in secret. Continued it's use, in secret, seemed quite fine with the existance of the program, in secret. Then when it became public, vigorously defended it, called it necessary for the safety of this country, stated he would continue to use it because our national defense depended on it...

Then his rating went into the toilet and his party took a pounding in november. Now he's not doing it anymore.

So it seems that with the republican party in general, and his administration specifically, in a real bad position with the public...now he decides that this program which he defended vigorously, which was crucial to our security, which he had NO problem doing while it was secret, isn't so necessary anymore

Uncle Sam is listening to you...

wow, I'm surprised this didn't get more of a response.

I think the only reason he's doing it is to prevent the responsibility from falling to the NEXT president.

He doesn't want to hand a potential Democratic candidate another issue to beat the Republicans in the head with.

wow, I'm surprised this didn't get more of a response.

I'm not, seems as if people are only focused on the negatives of President Bush, anytime there's something positive it is either ignored or turned to look as a negative.

I'm not, seems as if people are only focused on the negatives of President Bush, anytime there's something positive it is either ignored or turned to look as a negative.

What's there to really debate about? The wiretaps still exist but are under court supervision, so the people who thought the wiretaps necessary are happy, and the people who wanted their to be judicial supervision are happy. This move is generally uncontroversial and popular, which is IMHO why Bush has done it. Hence lack of debate.

I bet its lie. He's only saying he's stopping the taps so congress won't get pissed at him. He's probably listening to us right now. Or reading this rather. So if he is, :upyours: Mr. president.

I'm not, seems as if people are only focused on the negatives of President Bush, anytime there's something positive it is either ignored or turned to look as a negative.

What, are we supposed to throw flower pedals after he finally does what he should have done in the first place, that he more or less had to be forced to do? Because make no mistake, if there was still a Republican led legislature he wouldn't be doing this, as it is the resistance he's going to get from them now is far less likely to be 'token.' (after that silly non-binding resolution, I won't guarantee that it won't be token, however...)

If you had to bitch out your 12 year old for a week to clean his room you don't give him ice cream for finally doing it, you tell him that next time you shouldn't have to bitch him out for so long.

It's just the Frat Boy in Chief giving in to the finally fed-up college administration. I bet he smirked when he told Gonzales (or whomever) to make the announcement.

I'm not, seems as if people are only focused on the negatives of President Bush, anytime there's something positive it is either ignored or turned to look as a negative.

Deciding not to do something bad does not count as a 'positive'.

If I had spent my time with my ear pressed against your bedroom wall, and then one day decided to stop doing it, I haven't done anything positive at all, I've just stopped being a nosy asshole.

Deciding not to do something bad does not count as a 'positive'.

If I had spent my time with my ear pressed against your bedroom wall, and then one day decided to stop doing it, I haven't done anything positive at all, I've just stopped being a nosy asshole.

Point.

It's like a dick asking for a parade because for a minute he wasn't a dick.

Tell me once again, the story of how a secret court with secret proceedings is transparency in government.

Tell me once again, the story of how a secret court with secret proceedings is transparency in government.

it has little to do with tranparency, and not a lot to do with judicial oversight (as both are lacking).

It has to do with the rule of law, and how everyone, even President George W. Bush, is bound to it.

With a new Democratic House, I doubt he thought he would be able to keep getting away with it; that'swhy he's not bothering to try to reauthorize it.

I bet its lie. He's only saying he's stopping the taps so congress won't get pissed at him. He's probably listening to us right now. Or reading this rather. So if he is, :upyours: Mr. president.He'd hardly need a warrant to read this, considering that this is a public forum and all.

Tell me once again, the story of how a secret court with secret proceedings is transparency in government.

it's not. it's just that he should have gone to the Fisa court in the first place and he though he was above the law. Now they are actually holding him to the same standards the rest of us have to follow. Damn them!

What, are we supposed to throw flower pedals after he finally does what he should have done in the first place, that he more or less had to be forced to do? Because make no mistake, if there was still a Republican led legislature he wouldn't be doing this, as it is the resistance he's going to get from them now is far less likely to be 'token.' (after that silly non-binding resolution, I won't guarantee that it won't be token, however...)

If you had to bitch out your 12 year old for a week to clean his room you don't give him ice cream for finally doing it, you tell him that next time you shouldn't have to bitch him out for so long.

Seconded!

I'm not, seems as if people are only focused on the negatives of President Bush, anytime there's something positive it is either ignored or turned to look as a negative.

And then there are those of us who, because of the way he's flouted the law over the last six years, are waiting for the catch. I don't actually think Bush has changed his tune on this--I think he thinks he's got a loophole, or that he's full of shit, all based on his previous actions.