Bush Admin: Constitutionality of Wiretapping Unchallengable In Court

[Ax]

So I guess you think you would have been derelict in your duty if you didn't make personal attacks on me? WTG. :applause:

You mean like you do with Bush, Cheney, etc...?

If their character can be "attacked", or slandered by you, isn't it fair to think your own could be called into question. Maybe you should practice what you preach. :2cents:

[AsburySkinsFan]

You mean like you do with Bush, Cheney, etc...?

If their character can be "attacked", or slandered by you, isn't it fair to think your own could be called into question. Maybe you should practice what you preach. :2cents:

All you know about me is what I type, I know about them by what they say and I can also see what they do, the policies they support, and the wars they start. You sir know nothing of my actions off this forum, yet you think you know me. I'd be willing to guess that I know more about Bush & Cheney than you do about me.

[Popeman38]

All you know about me is what I type, I know about them by what they say and I can also see what they do, the policies they support, and the wars they start. You sir know nothing of my actions off this forum, yet you think you know me. I'd be willing to guess that I know more about Bush & Cheney than you do about me.

I am more than willing to bet that you know less about the program that is debated in this thread and the way it is administered than you claim to know.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I am more than willing to bet that you know less about the program that is debated in this thread and the way it is administered than you claim to know.

That's right, because its a "state secret" and as such I have no right to know what my government is doing with its domestic spying program, and apparently the only people who do know are those in the administration. Which is exactly the point, we want accountability and some form of transparency when it comes to our government turning its spy tools on its own people.

[Ax]

All you know about me is what I type, I know about them by what they say and I can also see what they do, the policies they support, and the wars they start.

Correct. But you know little to nothing of how or why they came to some of the decisions they have. But no matter what those things were, you come off as being absolutely certain that they were wrong, at best, or calculatingly evil in their intent. As if you can read their mind.

You sir know nothing of my actions off this forum, yet you think you know me. I'd be willing to guess that I know more about Bush & Cheney than you do about me.

Correct again. I can only go by what I have read from you here. I have an opinion. I also know that I may be completely wrong. You should try and imagine the possibility that you could be about them, as well.

And I'd be willing to guess that I know more about Bush & Cheney, than you do.

[Popeman38]

That's right, because its a "state secret" and as such I have no right to know what my government is doing with its domestic spying program, and apparently the only people who do know are those in the administration. Which is exactly the point, we want accountability and some form of transparency when it comes to our government turning its spy tools on its own people.

Here is a little secret of which you apperently have not been informed: You can't publicize what you are doing that is classified. That is why we have classifications, so that information that could cause grave damage to the security of this country and her citizens does not fall into the hands of those who would do us harm. You will NEVER, even if the Dems sweep every election for the next 100 years, have access to this information from your house. What you do have access to is the actual law, and how it is administered. You use the word transperency. What does that mean? Clear, you can see through it. Well, if the general public can see through it, so to can our enemies. And if the enemies can see through it, they can exploit it so that we are less secure. I don't see how you can't comprehend this.

[Ax]

and apparently the only people who do know are those in the administration.

This goes to what I said before about disinformation. There is oversight. By some of the very people you see on the news railing against the whole thing.

It's all part of the game. Details of which will not, and should not, ever make it out to John Q. Public, or, Mr. I Hate Americans.

That's the way it is.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Correct. But you know little to nothing of how or why they came to some of the decisions they have. But no matter what those things were, you come off as being absolutely certain that they were wrong, at best, or calculatingly evil in their intent. As if you can read their mind.

Correct again. I can only go by what I have read from you here. I have an opinion. I also know that I may be completely wrong. You should try and imagine the possibility that you could be about them, as well.

And I'd be willing to guess that I know more about Bush & Cheney, than you do.

You say all this and yet you felt perfectly free to do the exact same thing that you condemned me for doing. What's more Ax is that I have kept in mind that I could be wrong about Bush, but the problem is Ax that I once stood on the other side of the fence with Bush. I used to trust him, I voted for him twice, I used to believe that he had the best plan for America, and I turned out to be wrong. And yet you are still in the same position where you started and you claim that I just need to listen to the right people, my guess it that those are the same people that you listen too; one problem...I used to listen to them too.

[AsburySkinsFan]

This goes to what I said before about disinformation. There is oversight. By some of the very people you see on the news railing against the whole thing. It's all part of the game. Details of which will not, and should not, ever make it out to John Q. Public, or, Mr. I Hate Americans. That's the way it is.

If I trusted the Dems I would have voted for them.

[Ax]

You say all this and yet you felt perfectly free to do the exact same thing that you condemned me for doing.

Just to make a point. Not as personal as it seemed. Though perfectly understandable how you took it as such.

What's more Ax is that I have kept in mind that I could be wrong about Bush, but the problem is Ax that I once stood on the other side of the fence with Bush. I used to trust him, I voted for him twice, I used to believe that he had the best plan for America, and I turned out to be wrong.

Constantly stating how you were once with him, may carry weight with some, that you apparently hope it does. It does not with me. I know your story on that, it doesn't change things to keep hearing it repeated. Not a criticism, just a statement.

And, BTW, you could still be wrong about Bush & Co. That's all I'm saying.

And yet you are still in the same position where you started and you claim that I just need to listen to the right people, my guess it that those are the same people that you listen too; one problem...I used to listen to them too.

The difference is I never had to be sold on going into Iraq. I've thought we should have done it the first time our planes were fired on in the "No Fly" zones. Any one, of a number of reasons, was good enough for me. So, of course my position hasn't changed. I don't agree with everything that's taken place, but I'm smart enough to know that I don't have the information necessary to make an informed judgement. Nobody on this board does.