tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post113634891837095355..comments2024-03-26T17:44:07.430-04:00Comments on Viking Pundit: Erichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15911276942829790135noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136444700226635842006-01-05T02:05:00.000-05:002006-01-05T02:05:00.000-05:00That's some "coup de grace" from the almost-aptly-...That's some "coup de grace" from the almost-aptly-named Rick Moran. He continues:<BR/><I>Either you believe there is a grave threat to the Republic and will do everything in your power to support the government’s legitimate efforts to protect us or you believe that abstract notions and ivory tower formulations of Constitutional limits on the exercise of executive power should outweigh the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136422167692838272006-01-04T19:49:00.000-05:002006-01-04T19:49:00.000-05:00In particular, this sentence is baffling: “The Whi...<I>In particular, this sentence is baffling: “The White House has yet to show that national security was harmed by the report on electronic spying, which did not reveal the existence of such surveillance - only how it was being done in a way that seems outside the law.”</I><BR/><BR/>You must be easily baffled. The sentence makes sense by itself, and in context. What it says is that presidents Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136417521279730052006-01-04T18:32:00.000-05:002006-01-04T18:32:00.000-05:00Thanks for clarifying. For a second there, I was t...Thanks for clarifying. For a second there, I was taking you seriously.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136417515367616342006-01-04T18:31:00.000-05:002006-01-04T18:31:00.000-05:00Joe, thanks again for pointing out the article ent...Joe, thanks again for pointing out the article entitled "NSA acted on its own". You're right. After 9/11 NSA did act on its own, based on an old Reagan executive order, #12333. Take a look at section 2.5. It details out the need for Attorney General approval and the need to conduct surveillance in accordance with FISA. So we know that Ashcroft would have had to approve the taps and that a Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136417433872670902006-01-04T18:30:00.000-05:002006-01-04T18:30:00.000-05:00Thanks for clarifying. For a second there, I was t...Thanks for clarifying. For a second there, I was taking you seriously.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136415499336099562006-01-04T17:58:00.000-05:002006-01-04T17:58:00.000-05:00Sorry to confuse you Joe Friday. The President of...Sorry to confuse you Joe Friday. <BR/><BR/>The President of the United States of America is sworn to uphold the laws of the nation. By circumventing FISA, this president has put himself above the law and shows contempt for America and its citizens.<BR/><BR/>And if you "conservatives" would pull your heads out of your asses for 10 seconds... No one has said that the intercepts are illegal. We Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136413976877642182006-01-04T17:32:00.000-05:002006-01-04T17:32:00.000-05:00oh wait.. maybe you were referring to the recent N...oh wait.. maybe you were referring to the recent New York Times article that claims that the NSA didn't directly involve the President<BR/><BR/>http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/4/141721.shtmlJoeFridayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01065432894361393547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136413127094002992006-01-04T17:18:00.000-05:002006-01-04T17:18:00.000-05:00I'm confused... what does 'hating America' have to...I'm confused... what does 'hating America' have to do with abiding by the law?JoeFridayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01065432894361393547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136413062202493342006-01-04T17:17:00.000-05:002006-01-04T17:17:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.JoeFridayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01065432894361393547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136412565411445282006-01-04T17:09:00.000-05:002006-01-04T17:09:00.000-05:00Is that what supporting Bush requires these days? ...Is that what supporting Bush requires these days? You consider abiding by the law to be a "DU talking point"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136412443528506822006-01-04T17:07:00.000-05:002006-01-04T17:07:00.000-05:00Those intercepts have been a common practice over ...Those intercepts have been a common practice over the years, and their legality is well established, but keep talking, liberals -- keep reminding us why you simply cannot be taken seriously with national security issues.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136411605501938802006-01-04T16:53:00.000-05:002006-01-04T16:53:00.000-05:00that must be the same day Bush was 'selected, not ...that must be the same day Bush was 'selected, not elected'.. and you're mixing up your DU talking points, gridlock.. W doesn't hate americans.. he just hates black peopleJoeFridayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01065432894361393547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136408342453434342006-01-04T15:59:00.000-05:002006-01-04T15:59:00.000-05:00Does anyone know the date when Americans stopped b...Does anyone know the date when Americans stopped being responsible citizens by requiring their President to uphold the laws of this nation? <BR/><BR/>W admitted that he circumvented FISA law and the secret court. When he said that he said that the Times article was accurate. If he had upheld the law and followed procedure there would have been no leak and no article.<BR/><BR/>Why does George Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136402538106173792006-01-04T14:22:00.000-05:002006-01-04T14:22:00.000-05:00doesn't that sound eerily similar to comments made...doesn't that sound eerily similar to comments made by Mary Mapes when asked why CBS didn't authenticate the Rathergate memos.. Reporter Brian Ross asked "Have they proved to be authentic though? Isn't that really what journalists do?" Whereupon Mapes responded "No, I don't think that's the standard."<BR/><BR/>you see, reporters don't need to prove things.. according to them, they can make any JoeFridayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01065432894361393547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136373483928289442006-01-04T06:18:00.000-05:002006-01-04T06:18:00.000-05:00It's been hilarious to hear some of the same peopl...It's been hilarious to hear some of the same people who insisted that Valerie Plame's CIA identity was citywide knowledge for years, and thus she couldn't even have <B>been</B> "outed"... but that the U.S.A. tapping enemy phones was the Secret of the Century until last week. Have some mustard on that pretzel logic, boys.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136360875360050662006-01-04T02:47:00.000-05:002006-01-04T02:47:00.000-05:00Yes, I do. It was 1787."Were it left to me to dec...Yes, I do. It was 1787.<BR/><BR/><I>"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." <BR/> --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136357998146339912006-01-04T01:59:00.000-05:002006-01-04T01:59:00.000-05:00I guess we'll have to wait for the next terrorist ...I guess we'll have to wait for the next terrorist attack on New York. The only problem is that if the bad guys get their way there won't be any New York Times for us to say 'told you so.'<BR/><BR/>Sanctimonious Bastards.<BR/><BR/>Does anyone know the date when "American" journalists stopped being citizens of this country and started being "world citizens"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136354929670156882006-01-04T01:08:00.000-05:002006-01-04T01:08:00.000-05:00So basically the Times is saying "Accurate but fak...So basically the Times is saying "Accurate but fake."Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01026800013174349238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4053585.post-1136353482407270842006-01-04T00:44:00.000-05:002006-01-04T00:44:00.000-05:00Pop a Tums. Two words: Pentagon Papers. Yeah, po...Pop a Tums. Two words: Pentagon Papers. Yeah, posterity has been <B>so</B> brutal to the Times over that "disgraceful" leak "during a time of war." Fortunately, no one bought the "national security" lie then, either.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com