NSA Spying Broader Than Bush Admitted

I feel a lot safer now. Thanks for the info. And of course it is bigger than he has admited. He would have admited no classified info if the traitors had not caused it to come out. He is a real leader, keeping the court in their place and portecting America.

[ December 24, 2005, 02:32 AM: Message edited by: Bunyon ]

 

Yea, right.

Bush is an idiot!

 

At least he is not a traitor like Clinton was. He and Gov. Richardson gave away tech. and secrets to China. Bush is not selling us out, he is trying to protect us. The courts can't and wont do it.

 

If Clinton had been a traitor, Starr would have nailed him.

 

If anyone believes that Bush is the first, or last, president to do this kind of thing he/she is crazy. Look at American history people.

Another thing. If anyone truly believes that they have privacy he/she is in a dream world.

Nothing surprises me in this story; it is the same old same old. Lying national democratic leaders verses dishonest national republican leaders. Have you noticed, btw, that the liberal/democratic politicians are not complaining that Bush spied? No, rather they are complaining that (a) they were not consulted and (b) he did not get a secret warrant. These liberals are not concerned with your privacy! Please DON'T be fooled! They don't want you to have true privacy anymore than the political conservatives do. It's all a smoke and mirrors game!! Rather they are just angry that Bush got something over on them (at least that is what they want us to believe, and I am not sure that I do).


Martin.

 

I know that our tabloid society loves to demonize Bush based on NYT stories from un-named sources and no actual evidence, but perhaps, you might control your urges to bash Bush just long enough to ask the liberal rag to actually produce some evidence before we accuse him of being a terrible dictator:

 

Starr didn't investigate Chinagate.

 

If these lead stories a true, I am very glad. Our saftey is worth that and more. You heel draggers are not going to want to accept any responsibility when catastrophy strikes again, but you will be culpable. You are part of the trend (somewhat unwittingly, I hope) to destroy America's abiblity to prosecute war anywhere in the world in defense of our country. And you're being tossed around like puppets on a string, with no understanding of end times, so sad.

 

Our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, powers and rulers of the darkness of this world. Eph6:12

You must see that verse in the flesh in Washington today. Nearly every day the small group of vocal Democrats (Some Republicans too) give aid and comfort to the enemy. And even they are duped. They think it is a political struggle for power, when in fact they are on a course systematically advocating our destruction. The powers that be are bent on reducing our power in order to attack and destroy Israel finally and permanently, without interference.

 

The legalities are indisputable, except to you who hate the commander in chief and this nation.
Once again you attack with commoners drivel, instead of with substance.

 

What a great description of the Bush administration in this matter. I couldn't have phrased it better myself. </font>[/QUOTE]And yet again you are out of context and vacuous in your reply.

 

Hillclimber for president!

 

The legalities are indisputable, except to you who hate the commander in chief and this nation.
Once again you attack with commoners drivel, instead of with substance. </font>[/QUOTE]We are not the only ones questioning the legalities, there are members of Congress from both sides who are also questioning this. It's not a matter of someone "hating" the commander in chief, it's about wether the commander in cheif is following the laws that are in place. No one is above the Constitution, not the president, not Congress, not the SCOTUS!

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
--Theodore Roosevelt

 

"2) Thank you. I am definitely a commoner, not an elitist like you apparently are."--------------------------------------------------------------

I think you are upset because the unions are going down. What is your real issue with Bush. I mean just a few weeks ago it was "Condi for president."

 

1) I voted for George W. Bush twice. I do not hate this nation and I must ask that you retract your libel toward me.

2) Thank you. I am definitely a commoner, not an elitist like you apparently are. </font>[/QUOTE]You have put on the shoe. "You" in this case is all inclusive, as to those to whom it applies.
Oh I demand a retraction and apology for calling me an elitist. (silliness)