Skip to comments.
Specter: Administration broke law
UPI ^
| February 5, 2006
Posted on 02/05/2006 5:19:32 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-95 last
To: PhiKapMom
They took him totally out of context.
All the folks crucifying the man need to read the transcript. What UPI printed just ain't what he said. They're lying, and people are believing the lie based on their own personal feelings about Specter (which I usually share... but fair is fair, here).
To: Captainpaintball
This is the thanks Bush/Rove gets for saving Specter's rear during the 2004 GOP Senatorial primaries. What will all those schmucks on radio and FR who lectured us about strategery say now?
I know what I'll say: Read the transcript before spouting off like an ignorant jerk.
82
posted on
02/05/2006 10:42:06 PM PST
by
Chunga
(Mock The Left)
To: West Coast Conservative
The Bush administration says the surveillance has been carefully monitored and targeted at individuals with known or strongly suspected terrorist ties. But officials have also given different estimates of the amount of monitoring. How mean of them not to give all the terrorists out there the specifics.
83
posted on
02/05/2006 10:46:11 PM PST
by
Moonman62
(Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
To: dirtboy
Funny, but right after that Specter said FISA was probably unconstitutional. Wonder why that was left off? He also said that it depended on the circumstances, whether it dealt with spying related to national security or other crimes.
84
posted on
02/06/2006 2:55:12 AM PST
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Right, THIS UNGRATEFUL SOB:
85
posted on
02/06/2006 4:27:28 AM PST
by
W04Man
(Bush2004 Grassroots Campaign We Did It! NOW.... PLEASE STAY THE COURSE!)
To: West Coast Conservative
I'll bet the White House is delighted that they put their support behind Specter in the last election.
86
posted on
02/06/2006 7:03:03 AM PST
by
pabianice
(contact ebay??)
To: Para-Ord.45
I agree.
Just heard the illustrious legal scholar Sen. "Leakey" Lehey on the news telling AG Gonzalez that the warrantless searches were illegal and the Administration broke the law. Hummm?
Just think if Congress writing FISA trumps the Constitution or to say it better "limits" the Constitution the ... Congress can write another law which places them at the 'top of the heap' and that law will say that the Executive and the Judiciary can not review them. That too would then be legal under his reading.
I think not Sen. Dumb Cluck! Oh and as an aside, I wonder what 'leaks' next?
87
posted on
02/06/2006 8:17:00 AM PST
by
K-oneTexas
(I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
To: Jeff Head
I keep voting against him in the primaries, but I need some help. We almost got rid of him in the last election. I'm assuming that he won't run again because of his health. We need to be scouting for a good conservative to run for his seat in 2010. Never too early to keep our eyes open.
88
posted on
02/06/2006 11:35:37 AM PST
by
twigs
To: ronnied
Term limits is not a solution. It just gives more power to the people behind the elected officials. They are unseen and unelected. No thanks!
89
posted on
02/06/2006 11:38:17 AM PST
by
twigs
To: Chunga
I know what I'll say: Read the transcript before spouting off like an ignorant jerk. I read the transcrpit. The fact that Specter even is entertaining the idea is ridiculous, and typical of his slimy nature. Any moron could tell that the media invited him on their program for soundbite material that can easily be twisted to suit the 30-second top of the hour headline blurb. The way he answered the questions was classic: Arlen trying to be "Mr. Down-The-Middle", "Mr. Objective", "Mr. Above-The-Partisan-Fray" is in reality "Arlen the Useful Idiot." So, unless he is knowingly being used in exchange for face-time, this proves Specter is a sub-moron. The fact that you replied to my question proves you are a schmuck.
To: Captainpaintball
I read the transcrpit. The fact that Specter even is entertaining the idea is ridiculous, and typical of his slimy nature. Any moron could tell that the media invited him on their program for soundbite material that can easily be twisted to suit the 30-second top of the hour headline blurb. The way he answered the questions was classic: Arlen trying to be "Mr. Down-The-Middle", "Mr. Objective", "Mr. Above-The-Partisan-Fray" is in reality "Arlen the Useful Idiot." So, unless he is knowingly being used in exchange for face-time, this proves Specter is a sub-moron. The fact that you replied to my question proves you are a schmuck. Neither logic nor analysis is your forte, your language is tortured and your insults are pathetic.
Next time you ping somebody try to make it a little more interesting and a little less pitiable.
91
posted on
02/07/2006 1:55:02 AM PST
by
Chunga
(Mock The Left)
To: Captainpaintball; Chunga
I love a good fight!
So far I am for Captainpaintball even though he doesn't have a tag line because Chunga hasn't created an about page.
Fight!
92
posted on
02/07/2006 10:35:15 AM PST
by
TSchmereL
("Rust but terrify.")
To: TSchmereL
Think about it. Arlen tries to be this "down-the-middle" guy who is above the fray. He tries to be a Republican, but ends up a republican't because of his liberal leanings, and/or his need to please the pro-choicers that vote for him. he also likes face time. He will say anything, do anything to get on TV and make the liberals like him.
The liberals invite him on TV to McCain himself, and Sphincter winds up being used by these rats for their own purposes.
Sphincter should just shut up. Even if he says nothing they want to hear (or use), they can spin it whichever way they please; which is why I have a problem with him in the first place.
Why do these guys so blindly and pASSionately defend him?
93
posted on
02/07/2006 6:23:22 PM PST
by
Captainpaintball
(All it takes for evil to triumph is for Republicans to befriend, give in to, and act like, Democrats)
To: Captainpaintball
I have also been thinking along these lines.
Doesn't George W. Bush have this flaw too?
Why did he make so many overtures to Congressional Democrats?
If he didn't think FISA was strong enough, why didn't tell Congress to change it? What was he afraid of? If he had forced them on the issue, wouldn't they have had to deal with either looking soft on the War on Terror or giving the President more authority? (I am assuming that Bush is bound by FISA for the sake of the argument. I have to conclude the issue is debatable since Gonzales makes such a poor argument otherwise).
It is my theory that we have a war on two fronts, al Qaeda on one, self-interested Democrat policos on the other. How can Bush deal effectively with al Qaeda when he is letting the Democrats stab him in the back? When is he going to put some discipline into the Congressional Republicans and tell them to either get behind him or pay a political price for it?
The only thing I know for sure is that George W. Bush is not the son of Ronald Regan.
94
posted on
02/07/2006 6:37:21 PM PST
by
TSchmereL
("Rust but terrify.")
To: TSchmereL
The only thing I know for sure is that George W. Bush is not the son of Ronald Regan.And the only thing I know is that Bush is the red-headed stepchild of the clintons.
95
posted on
02/07/2006 6:42:09 PM PST
by
Captainpaintball
(All it takes for evil to triumph is for Republicans to befriend, give in to, and act like, Democrats)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-95 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson