Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (52648)	1/29/2006 5:47:53 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

clinton broke laws you don't even know about, lets see his Swiss bank accounts. "I did not have Quid Pro Quo with that man, Mr. Rich"

To: American Spirit who wrote (52648)	1/29/2006 6:55:24 PM
From: Ivan Inkling	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

Shrub keeps trying to sell more whoppers than Burger King. washingtonpost.com The following is from the above link ======================================================== Whopper Watch James Gordon Meek writes in the New York Daily News: "In speech after speech, President Bush claims that if the National Security Agency could have wiretapped two Al Qaeda operatives living in San Diego, the 9/11 attacks might have been thwarted. "That's a whopper, critics say. "'We didn't realize they were here plotting the attack until it was too late,' Bush said Wednesday at NSA headquarters. " 'It's not true,' ex-9/11 commissioner Bob Kerrey, president of the New School in Manhattan, told the Daily News. 'We knew about those two guys - the CIA lost them.' . . . " 'The problem was the CIA and FBI not communicating and not picking them up,' said Thomas Kean, the commission's former chairman."

To: American Spirit who wrote (52648)	1/29/2006 7:03:02 PM
From: Ivan Inkling	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

Politics of distortion and fear. washingtonpost.com The following is from the above link ============================================================ The Washington Post writes: "The Bush administration's distortion, for political purposes, of the Democratic position on warrantless surveillance is loathsome. Despite the best efforts of Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, and Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chairman, to make it seem otherwise, Democrats are not opposed to vigorous, effective surveillance that could uncover terrorist activity. Nor are the concerns that they are expressing unique to their party. . . . "Believing there should be constraints on unchecked executive power is not the same as being weak-kneed about the war against terrorism." The Philadelphia Inquirer writes: "Here's a statement with which no American concerned about preventing terrorist attacks would quarrel: " 'President Bush believes if al-Qaeda is calling somebody in America, it is in our national security interest to know who they're calling and why.' "Thus said chief presidential adviser Karl Rove last week. True to his partisan form, Rove then went on to claim that 'some important Democrats clearly disagree.' "Rove clearly has that wrong. The objections are not to the idea of spying on al-Qaeda. It's about the unaccountable, constitutionally dubious way the Bush administration put that idea into practice." Newsday writes: "In politics, a strong offense may well be the best defense. But in this fight Bush is peddling two false dichotomies. "First, that the debate is simply Republicans for, Democrats against. It isn't. Second, that the public must either accept this off-the-reservation electronic snooping or, as Gen. Michael Hayden, the administration's No. 2 intelligence official intimated, remain vulnerable to terrorist attack. That ignores the fact that there are well-established legal avenues for monitoring suspected terrorists that Bush simply chose to avoid. "Given Bush's claimed authority to spy on Americans without court oversight, the nation needs a sober debate on the limits of presidential power. What it doesn't need is a cynical appeal to partisanship and fear." The San Francisco Chronicle writes: "President Bush's public-relations offensive on behalf of his warrantless surveillance program is an insult to the intelligence of the American people. . . . "The talking point often parroted by Vice President Dick Cheney and Bush allies on Capitol Hill -- 'If al Qaeda is calling you, we want to know why' -- is a classic red herring. There is no doubt that such an eavesdropping request would fall within the 99-plus percent the FISA court is approving. "The question is: Will Congress have the fortitude to rein in a presidency that is acting as if it is above the law?" Opinion Watch: The Fear Factor Eugene Robinson writes in his Washington Post opinion column: "Once upon a time we had a great wartime president who told Americans they had nothing to fear but fear itself. Now we have George W. Bush, who uses fear as a tool of executive power and as a political weapon against his opponents." Leonard Pitts Jr. writes in his Miami Herald column: "Karl Rove said in a speech last week that this year's midterm election will be about security. So you know it will be about fear. . . . "The choice is simple: remain true to the ideals that have guided us for 230 years or surrender them on the altar of expedience because we were too scared to live up to them."