Like This
or this
or this
to mention a few, I ask out of curiousity if there is anyone still around nutty enough to support and/or defend the Bush regime , its policies, and its competance?

Just curious.

i think bush stinks

I love how you phrased the question. President Bush blows on most issues (ban the illegals damnit).

Initiate Fair Tax.
Stop increasing government spending for the love of god.
Dont reform social security, get rid of it.

I guess republicans in general are to blame. I hope they lose majority, maybe they'll realize their mistakes.

But yeah, call me Nutty, I still defend the Bush "regime" as you call it.

1 internet spying. The internet is one of the places that is not controled by anyone. You can do anything on it and it has no regulations. So if someone is spying on it not much you can do about it. Spyware--govware. I dont think its good but if you want technology with out laws this is what you will get.

2 leaking classified info. It is impossible for the president of the united states of american to leak info.
due to a 1983 law the president can declassify anything they want to.

3.Iranian nuklear program. How is this the presidents fault.
did not understand that one.

Now be nice to me I am the least educated of kgb so maybe you can explain these items to me and why bush is bad.

1) Not just internet, phone calls. Listening equipment on the switching equipment that handles the publics phone calls. Phone switching isnt analogue anymore.

2) The point is declassifying things solely for political reasons. I'm less concerned with legality here, than I am with the fact that the President was acting irresponsibly.

3) If you dont see how Iran making nukes, after we went to war with Iraq over nukes and other WMD (that didnt exist), I just dont know what to tell you. Why are we occupying Iraq which had no nukes , while allowing Islamic extremists with an worldview for amrageddon to obtain them? Because lack of foresight and judgement has put us in a position where we can do little about it.

I simply cannot understand how so many people can ignore the excesses of this regime. Just because you "like" a President, and because he was elected should not give him the right to step around and ignore the other branches of government. Nor does it give him license to ignore the Constitution.

Unfortunatly those who mistake themselves for conservatives
seem to have lost sight of the basic principles that this nation was founded upon, and grew strong following.

I find it extremely depressing that those who would think of themselves as conservatives would really be ok with secretive, corrupt government. It always seemed to me that Big Government was the desire of the Democrats and Socialists, it just still flabberghasts me that the biggest, most invasive government in the history of our nation has been implemented by someone who calls himself a conservative, with the blessing and support of a good portion of voters who call themselves conservatives.

Bush has been a fucking idiot since the day he was born, and has been making this country crappier since the day he was inagurated in 2001. It amazes me that it's taken so many people this long to realize how big of a tool he is.

I personally believe that the government has a responcibility to provide a social saftey net for its people (so count me in the big government camp). Yet, I believe in effective government, not this non-reality based, science-ignoring, don't-critisize-us-its-aiding-the-terrorists, fear-mongering idiotocracy that we have to put up with now.

I can't imagine what history is going to say about this guy in 50 years. He's going to make Herbert Hoover look like Einstein or something.

1) So the goverment is setting up equipment to use for spying I for one welcome it. Let it be ready when they need it or go your way and let the bad guys have the time it takes to set it up to kill people.

2) Or he declassifide it to let people know the truth
but that wouldnt work in the bush bashing so its for political power.

3) The question was why is it bush's fault they are making them. I know why its bad. Is blaming him just because hes a republican.

4) What excesses? explain what you mean again I really dont understand. And if he is ignoring the other branches the other branches would eat him alive. If you think he is, call you senator.

5) Secretive and corrupt. Yes on secretive no to corrupt.
Goverment is corrupt no matter what system or what party. It may start out with good intentions but will always fall to corruption by its very nature.

FYI I am niether dem or rep. I look at the whole picture.
from reading some of what you say you will never say anything to support bush because he is conservitive. I dont agree with everything he does or says but corruption,ignoring other branches,excess. tell me what you think he did not just a bunch of crap that doesnt mean anything.

I will look at what they do and say and compare. Just going out to say bad things about someone is not an argument.

Hell I can sit here and say bad things about clinton all day and you would defend him without even tring to see my side.

Thats the main problem with politicians both partys fight to win elections instead of doing whats right. How the hell can they fight over everything. Even me and my wife agree on things. It would be alot better if there were no partys think of all the waste that would be gone.
No political pressure to vote one way or another. unicameral or something like that not sure on the spelling.

Anyways I hate talking politics to much anger from people.

Article 1: I for one am not sure the Patriot Act was a good idea, it was passed in fear and passed when in normal circumstances it would not have passed like it did. However, i really don't mind it... I really just don't care if the government can tap phone lines. I don't have any thing to hide.

Article 2: The way the administration motivated America to war was through stretching the truth and working the system. Welcome to politics... if you really think any one else would have been more "honest" then i think thats naive. I don't support it, but implying Bush to be evil isn't solving any thing.

Article 3: Honestly they choose Iraq because it was an easier target. No one really knew whether Iraq or Iran was more dangerous, so you got to pick the easier target and hope it all pans out.


Honestly what are they gonna say about Bush 50 years from now? Not much different from any other president. America hates our current president, always.


As far as: democratic-republican, or Big-small gov. They are on two different scales. Democrats want the government in their pockets and out of their personal lives. Republicans want the government out of their pockets but in their private lives.

I'm personally pretty neutral Right/Left but leaning right on "family" issues. And i lean to big government over small.

But ya... dont listen to me... im nutty : P

""5) Secretive and corrupt. Yes on secretive no to corrupt.
Goverment is corrupt no matter what system or what party. It may start out with good intentions but will always fall to corruption by its very nature. ""

So you realize this, yet support unchecked power and secrecy (secrecy IS power). You really want the govt that will natually be corrupt to engage in unlimited secret spying of EVERYONE?

Also, that kind of spying (the wholesale type) doesnt net much good vs people who are trying to remain hidden. Its mainly usefull for gathering info on people who dont realize theyre being spied upon, or looked into.

Also assuming I would defend, or support Clinton on a wholesale level is beyond ridiculous and shows how ignorant your judgements are. I am a born and bred Republican, or was until the party got gripped by a fit of mass insanity.

The Republican party used to stand for Liberty, freedom to govern your private life as you choose, and the Constitution. I just hope the true republicans wake up soon and realize what a mockery the current regime has made of the Grand Ole Party.

Apparently everyone is taking their rights and liberty for granted. Historically, when that happens to a society, that society is only a hairs breadth away from the abyss of Tyranny or collapse.

Also, keep in mind that being "able" to tap a phone, with a warrant, and massive secret wholesale data-mining on the general populace are 2 very different things. Try not to confuse them.

on #1, I'm all for the lowdown secret wire tapping looking for terrorist and crap like that. Let them listen to me talk how I want to get nasty with the mistress. It's not like I'm IM'ing or talking on the phone to my Taliban friends about the next hit, so it shouldn't bother me. I seriously doubt they will go after me for downloading torrent files since it has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

P.S. I was kidding about the mistress. I can "barely" handly one woman. And barely is an exaggeration. More like "Dear God, help me"

Here is a essay by an actual security expert on wholesale data mining and its effectivness. Take a gander.

http://www.schneier.com/essay-108.html

The government keeping secrets is a good thing. I dont want to know all the dirty little things they do that allow me to go to the gas station to buy cheap fuel(historically it is cheaper then 1960) or that mars bar I hvae been craving or go to the strippers to waste my money.
BTW our government has had secrets since the day if became a country. Let them wire tap away if it keeps my kids safe and is not taking my rights away (which it has not). Tell me one way i am losing my rights and you may get me on yourside.

As for the data mining if as you say they dont want to be found then they have to live in the mountains using pony express to keep off the radar.

Did you hear of able danger they are the guys that data mined and found the 9/11 fuckers. Only reason it didnt help was they got stonewall by some asshole that didnt think it was a problem. Data mining may be costly and not very effective but with future technolgy and info of past usagae it will get better. Its a new and the bugs have to be worked out. And if they did get good info to stop an attack i doubt it would be public info for security reasons

Ok sorry about the clinton thing

for the rush haters
Rush Limbaugh made a better case against TIA a week after 9/11.
We now know a huge amount about the hijackers. We see a pattern.
If we had all that data the day before the hijacks, we could see a pattern,
but we COULD NOT MAKE AN ARREST.
They made phone calls, but they likely did not talk about plans.
They moved kids and money, but that is not illeagal.
They took flight lessons, but nothing wrong with that.
The best they could do, would have been to deport several of them.
Those deportations can take a loooooonnnngg time. (Ask Sami Al Arian)
The ACLU would have come to thier defence.
And they would not have been kept in jail while waiting.
So, gathering all that info to stop terror would not have stopped terror.
However, all this info gathering is good for catching drug dealers.
It is also useful if an agent wants to stalk some cute girl.

Actually Republicans tend to favor less involved gov.t, Bishop.

There is a big difference between a govt having secrets, and a govt being secretive. There is yet again a difference between a government being secretive, and a government being secretive about illegal activity.

Your also mistaken if you think that wholesale wiretapping isnt infringing upon your rights. Just because you are not directly feeling the effects yet, does not mean that it has no effect, or that it wont soon lead to worse infractions.

But, I guess we are just becoming a society where people will happily give up liberty for a false sense of security.

If the trend continues, and at this point I dont see anything able to stop it- we will soon have neither.

WHATS THE FIRST SIGN OF YOU GETTING THE BIRD FLU

YOU JUMP ON YOUR CAR AND SHIT ON YOUR WINDSHIELD

With respect to the first article, I would imagine that is it the equivalent of the warrently wiretaps of phone conversations the NSA is doing (legally), between known Al Quaida people overseas and their operatives in the US. If an email comes in from a known AQ guy, the NSA intercepts the message and analyzes it. Damn fine thing it is, too.

With respect to the second one, I agree with Helemoto. The President is the ultimate classifying authority, and can declassify information as he see's fit. Here
is a Washington Post editorial that discusses that far from being a politically motivated, President Bushs actions were entirely proper. They make a good argument.

As far as Iran is concerned, we are currently busy in both Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention Central/South America, Yemen, Ethiopia, the Phillipines, Mongolia, to mention only a few (see Robert Kaplan's excellent book, 'Imperial Grunts' to find out what is going on in all those places, and elsewhere). Given the demands currently on US armed forces, it's not surprising that at this time, we aren't invading Iran. However, that doesn't mean that nothing is being done. Currently, things are being conducted diplomatically, just as things were done prior to the start of the second Iraq war. It is premature to call the matter closed.

Always glad to relay information and clear up misunderstandings. Let me know if you are confused about other little things that are bothering you...

Your saying that secret installations at every metropolitan backbone are required to listen in legally on overseas conversation?

Dont think so. Targeted eavesdropping was taking place long before this period, and certainly didnt need Narus STA 6400's on every switching station. The NSA has probably had listening equipment at the stations that transport overseas for some time. They also tap into oceanic fiber lines via submarine. Theres no need to build a secret listening station in friggin Iowa to listen in on Al Queda overseas.



I'll read the article that argues it was a proper decision tommorow. I'll give you the benifit of the doubt here until I get time to look it over.

And as for the last, are you seriously going to make an argument that invading Iraq was a good idea, despite the fact that if we had not, we would be in a much better position diplomatically and militarily to do something about Iran? I doubt they would have had the guts, had we not mired ourselves in Iraq.

The point I was making is that unnecesarry wars havent helped our position in dealing with the real problems. This would be the President's decision, and he is the one accountable.


"Let me know if you are confused about other little things that are bothering you..."

Unfortunatly in order to clear up "misunderstandings" and allieviate confusion, something relevant is usually required.

I'm not saying your principles of "hunt the bad guys and kill them" are wrong Owain, far from it. But I really do think you give our current leadership far to much credit, both in the areas of competance and intent.

Intresting Stuff. - Nothing is secure.

How do you play the game you live? ~syev